On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Michael Neale <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> well replace intuitive with cohesive and consistent etc... do you
> agree with the gist of it then?


Yeh I would. I definitely agree it is underrated, both how difficult
and how important it is to get UI right.  I just think the article
overlooks the point (maybe intentionally) that not every user or user
base is the same and that it is pretty easy to find fault with a
system/ui when it is not built to the purpose or audience that you are
applying it to.

I think my position can be summarized as: Good UIs are not universal,
even if the principles that guide an effective UI are (and with a few
exceptions, they are).

>
> I so wish I had the skills that is described there, I have an enormous
> amount of respect for those who are able to get it right (I don't
> agree that you *can't* learn them), and desperately try to learn more
> myself, and practice...
>

> I think you could stretch user interface to include major apis, if you
> kind of tilt your head a bit... but still, I think its really the most
> important thing today.

APIs definitely need to be classed as UI, and treated with a level of
respect that is often lacking.  There are definite skills that apply
across the board to UI, be it API or GUI, like making it easy to do
the right thing, making it hard (impossible?) to do the wrong thing.

One interesting thing is that people feel it is generally acceptable
to evolve a GUI but not a programmatic API. I think everyone needs to
get over that. Change is awesome.

Mark.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to